ok so that is kind of what i am leaning to is that under a spell there is nothing stating that the sequential order is one after the other the attack rolls are only to ensure that each attack in and of itself is successful. I also want to reiterate one more time i 100% see the validity in additive from a stance based on real world physics but, recently i started entertaining the idea more along the lines that spells can only do exactly what they say they can do. so each spell leaves the hands together and strikes together. if we do not have the time to move between shots then how can we claim bolts of equivalent power strike only after the target is moved 10ft. this is more of a thought exercise for me.
This applies to all rules, not just spells. Applying that Rule to Repelling Blast : "When you hit a creature with Eldritch Blast you can push that creature 10 feet away from you..." . If it only does what it says it does, then it works every time you hit a creature, regardless of how many times it has been hit before. Your own words prove our argument, and exclude yours by default, because for your argument to work, you have to add an exception to the invocation that just isn't there.
look I am not sayin the additive is wrong I am simplify trying to point out that all of the blasts strike the target one the same space allowing UP to 10ft of movement from the spot. if you want the move to be additive that is fine but there is nothing to support that because spells are not Physics like in real life they are spells they do only exactly what they say. you can rule them to add up but being that all of the strikes leave the caster at the same time on cast i find it debatable that you can move the target only up to 10ft. Can you at least come too see this side of the debate that I am approaching this from?
My emphasis: bold red. These two statements are simply not true.
All of the blasts do not have to strike the target at the same location; the spell targets the creature, not the spot they're at. All of the blasts do not (possibly cannot) leave the caster or strike the target at the same time. One attack roll per beam, not per target. Think about how archery works with Extra Attack. If you can fire your bow multiple times per Attack action, you don't fire multiple arrows at the same time. Even if you're attacking the same target with all of your attacks, you resolve each attack roll sequentially.
We all understand where you're coming from with your view. What we would like for you to understand is that the conclusion you draw is based on an imperfect understanding of how the spell itself functions. That's easy to fix; no big deal!
You're misreading the idea of a blast effect as a salvo or volley. The latter two ideas imply a staggered or sequential effect (one beam after another). Blast implies a activity grouped within the same instance (a "zzzzzap" as opposed to "zap" "zap" "zap"). If you had multiple d20s you'd best capture the effects of the beam by rolling one for each beam all at once. Most people don't want to count dice pools so table convention allows you to roll one after the other. Think a double barrel shotgun or a pepperbox weapon with all barrels ready to fire at once (slugs instead of shot in both cases so we don't have to think of spread akin to AoE). Now does a magical effect compound damage or physically moving force if multiple beams are at play? that's debatable. But I don't think the assumption that each beam strikes in a succession is helping your argument, it's offering a misrepresentation of the effect.
Whether you emit the beams sequentially or in unison is 1) not something that's actually stated at all, so it's entirely a function of the player's description and 2) entirely irrelevant. Repelling blast is extraordinarily clear: "When you hit... you push..." If you hit five times, you push five times. The invocation cares exactly zero about when the hits are, relative to each other.
look I am not sayin the additive is wrong I am simplify trying to point out that all of the blasts strike the target one the same space allowing UP to 10ft of movement from the spot. if you want the move to be additive that is fine but there is nothing to support that because spells are not Physics like in real life they are spells they do only exactly what they say. you can rule them to add up but being that all of the strikes leave the caster at the same time on cast i find it debatable that you can move the target only up to 10ft. Can you at least come too see this side of the debate that I am approaching this from?
My emphasis: bold red. These two statements are simply not true.
All of the blasts do not have to strike the target at the same location; the spell targets the creature, not the spot they're at. All of the blasts do not (possibly cannot) leave the caster or strike the target at the same time. One attack roll per beam, not per target. Think about how archery works with Extra Attack. If you can fire your bow multiple times per Attack action, you don't fire multiple arrows at the same time. Even if you're attacking the same target with all of your attacks, you resolve each attack roll sequentially.
We all understand where you're coming from with your view. What we would like for you to understand is that the conclusion you draw is based on an imperfect understanding of how the spell itself functions. That's easy to fix; no big deal!
You're misreading the idea of a blast effect as a salvo or volley. The latter two ideas imply a staggered or sequential effect (one beam after another). Blast implies a activity grouped within the same instance (a "zzzzzap" as opposed to "zap" "zap" "zap"). If you had multiple d20s you'd best capture the effects of the beam by rolling one for each beam all at once. Most people don't want to count dice pools so table convention allows you to roll one after the other. Think a double barrel shotgun or a pepperbox weapon with all barrels ready to fire at once (slugs instead of shot in both cases so we don't have to think of spread akin to AoE). Now does a magical effect compound damage or physically moving force if multiple beams are at play? that's debatable. But I don't think the assumption that each beam strikes in a succession is helping your argument, it's offering a misrepresentation of the effect.
The title of the spell is not the rule of the spell, but also, how do you roll to hit all at once, then roll damage for each, while selecting individual targets and tracking hit rolls, AC, and damage? But its a moot point any way...if you target an enemy with 3 of 4 blasts, do you roll to hit once or three times? you roll 3 times. If you hit 2 times, then the invocation applies twice, because the invocation activates on a hit.. if you hit twice, it activates twice.
There is no exception Each blast moves the target Up to 10ft but it is only 10ft this is not real life it is a spell it can only move the target 10ft from the point of impact I know other DM will not rule this way but what I am saying is that this is a legal way to rule the spell at discretion.
There is no exception Each blast moves the target Up to 10ft but it is only 10ft this is not real life it is a spell it can only move the target 10ft from the point of impact I know other DM will not rule this way but what I am saying is that this is a legal way to rule the spell at discretion.
No, it is not a "legal" way to rule the spell, except in the sense that a DM is free to ignore whatever rules they want. Each hit moves the target up to 10 feet. If there are five hits, each one moves the target up to 10 feet entirely separately from the others. That is the only way to rule that is consistent with the actual text.
There is no exception Each blast moves the target Up to 10ft but it is only 10ft this is not real life it is a spell it can only move the target 10ft from the point of impact I know other DM will not rule this way but what I am saying is that this is a legal way to rule the spell at discretion.
If each blast moves the target up to 10 feet, then 3 blasts can move a target up to 30 feet (10 per each blast). Again, these are your words, and they are proving our point. The spell doesn't care where you are when you start. it targets you, not the spot. This is very plain english, and at this point I have to believe you are either trolling or just in denial that you could be wrong (and again, very clearly, you are wrong here)
There is no exception Each blast moves the target Up to 10ft but it is only 10ft this is not real life it is a spell it can only move the target 10ft from the point of impact I know other DM will not rule this way but what I am saying is that this is a legal way to rule the spell at discretion.
I already responded to this "up to 10 ft" part. It says that because an obstacle might get in the way and not be able to push the creature 10 ft. There could be a wall directly behind them and they don't get moved at all. If it didn't say "up to" then theoretically it could push a creature through literally anything because they would be moved 10 ft regardless (because spells do what they say they do).
ok so then u can shot 1 beam and move select a new target and fire the second beam by that logic then right.
No, you cannot interject movement between attacks of a multi-attack spell, but you're getting closer. The general rule is that you can break up your movement before and after taking an action, not during.
The ability to move in-between attacks is explicitly a specific exception, and it only applies to actions involving multiple weapon attacks. That's usually just the Attack action for PCs.
You can break up your movement on your turn, using some of your speed before and after your action. For example, if you have a speed of 30 feet, you can move 10 feet, take your action, and then move 20 feet.
Moving Between Attacks
If you take an action that includes more than one weapon attack, you can break up your movement even further by moving between those attacks. For example, a fighter who can make two attacks with the Extra Attack feature and who has a speed of 25 feet could move 10 feet, make an attack, move 15 feet, and then attack again.
thats my issue because u can not move and choose different targets for spells such as scorching ray.
Move? No, that is correct, you cannot move. Choose different targets? Yes, you absolutely can.
Scorching Ray resolves the same way as Eldritch Blast does. It can produce multiple beams, you can designate your target for each beam, and each beam is resolved as an independent attack/damage roll. You do not have to "lock in" your targeting. If beam #1 kills target #1, choose a new target (in range) for additional beams. You can do them one at a time.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
here lies the issue YES all can move the target 10ft. No this does not ensure that each moves it an additional 10ft. Each blast colliding moves the target 10ft from that point in which the spell collides with the target.
here lies the issue YES all can move the target 10ft. No this does not ensure that each moves it an additional 10ft. Each blast colliding moves the target 10ft from that point in which the spell collides with the target.
Except that's not true because they do not hit simultaneously (because the spell doesn't say it does - whereas another spell (MM) does). If they hit simultaneously there could be an argument to say they are only 1 attack - but they are not - they are multiple attacks. So they hit and move and hit and move and so on.
To say they all hit before they move the target is literally making up a rule.
It says it moves the target per hit. It doesn't say "per hit but only once per target".
here lies the issue YES all can move the target 10ft. No this does not ensure that each moves it an additional 10ft. Each blast colliding moves the target 10ft from that point in which the spell collides with the target.
Where, exactly, is the point in which the spell collides with the target? Wherever the target is located at that moment.
Where does beam #1 collide with the target? Where the target is standing at the moment they are hit. The target is pushed back 10 feet.
Where does beam #2 collide with the target? Where the target is standing at the moment they are hit, which is 10 feet away from where they were before beam #1. The target is pushed back 10 feet.
Where does beam #3 collide with the target? Where the target is standing at the moment they are hit, which is 20 feet away from where they were before beam #1, and 10 feet away from where they were before beam #2. The target is pushed back 10 feet.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
there is nothing stating the beams collided in that order. Again if that is what you want that is fine you can rule that. However i think it is disingenuous to not see the other side where all 3 beams are making contact at the same time each roll is only to see if the beams deal appropriate damage.
there is nothing stating the beams collided in that order. Again if that is what you want that is fine you can rule that. However i think it is disingenuous to not see the other side where all 3 beams are making contact at the same time each roll is only to see if the beams deal appropriate damage.
but the roll isn't just doing that; its determining a "hit" which also determines (in this case) whether the repelling effect takes place. Each roll determines each hit, which triggers each application of the invocation. You don't get to say "it doesn't move you this time" on a second or third hit because the rules don't allow you to.
What the heck happened? This question was answered a year ago.
Repelling blast triggers for each hit, of which there can be multiple depending on caster level. There aren't any other rules at play here, just the spell and the feature.
As for whether or not there has been a ruling on if the rules as written work as written, there conveniently is in the SAC on DDB:
When casting a spell that affects multiple targets, such as scorching ray or eldritch blast , do I fire one ray or beam, determine the result, and fire again? Or do I have to choose all the targets before making any attack rolls?
Even though the duration of each of these spells is instantaneous, you choose the targets and resolve the attacks consecutively, not all at once. If you want, you can declare all your targets before making any attacks, but you would still roll separately for each attack (and damage, if appropriate).
This makes it clear that you hit the target, it gets pushed back, then next beam you roll to attack in its new position, from which it can be pushed again if hit.
Here are three possible interpretations of how the spell and invocation work. All are internally logical, but based on different assumptions and interpretations of orders of things. Assume 4 beams are to be fired at one creature, and all attacks hit:
1. The caster chooses the creature. Rolls 4 attack dice. Creature takes 4x damage. Creature flies 40ft back based on additive spell effect.
2. The caster chooses the creature. Rolls 4 attack dice. Creature takes 4x damage. Because each beam is only moving the creature 10ft from this point of impact, creatures moves 10ft.
3. The caster chooses the creature. Rolls 1 attack dice. Creature takes 1x damage, moves 10ft. Caster chooses same creature again. Repeat, moving 10ft each time.
Of those three, I prefer 2 and 3 for personal interpretation reasons (I dislike 1 because spells don't usually combine cumulative effects other than damage). But they are different in many ways. If you subscribe to 2, then you must choose all targets of Eldritch Blast before any dice are rolled. 3, and you must ask the question, what happens if the first beam knocks the target out of range or kills it? Choose another target? 3 feels like an interpretation that results in the spell being generally more powerful, while 1 or 2 are more time-efficient.
I acknowledge the general principle of non-simultaneity which might point us toward interpretation 3, but the vast majority of spells which have us choose multiple targets require all choices at the moment of casting, so there is a natural reluctance to head that way just for this spell.
None of these are illogical interpretations. Please avoid talking down to the other side of the debate like they are morons who just couldn't possibly understand the rules.
The point of impact is the creature - not the space it is on - because the creature is the target. It is 1. or 3. on the list depending on how the player decides to lay out their attacks. They are perfectly ok to choose each target after making their attacks - but they are also perfectly ok to choose them all up-front and in either situation there is no difference to the outcome. There are still 4 attacks - 4 hits and 4 pushbacks.
The rules on stacking spell effects apply to spells with overlapping durations. Spells with duration Instantaneous cannot overlap as they are resolved instantly. Sage Advice Compendium also specifies that spells that let you make multiple attack rolls are resolved independently and sequentially, again meaning they don't overlap.
Repelling blast applies on a hit, and eldritch blast targets a creature, not a point. This means the following:
Each push effect is resolved on a hit and does not overlap with each other push effect
Each push effect moves the creature up to 10 feet from its current location as it doesn't target the location the creature is in, but the creature itself
As long as the creatures stays within the range of eldritch blast, you can continue to push the creature multiple times with each blast that hits
The point of impact is the creature - not the space it is on - because the creature is the target. It is 1. or 3. on the list depending on how the player decides to lay out their attacks. They are perfectly ok to choose each target after making their attacks - but they are also perfectly ok to choose them all up-front and in either situation there is no difference to the outcome. There are still 4 attacks - 4 hits and 4 pushbacks.
The point of impact is the creature, but if 4 things push the same creature 10ft each in the same direction from the same point at the same time, then it is not assumed by all of us that the result of that is an additive 40ft. That is not written anywhere. It is a perfectly sensible interpretation, but it isn't the only one.
And I think the point is a DM should choose which of these perfectly sensible options they will use every time, because they all have different results in different situations. If a creature is standing on a low ridge then a single beam might knock them backwards and down into full cover so under interpretation 3 they can no longer be targeted, while an additive four beams from interpretation 1 might knock them all the way off the cliff behind the ridge and kill them.
This group of DMs does not agree on which interpretation is correct, so you can't assume your players will all your share your interpretation. It is a conversation that may need to be had before it becomes an argument at the table or a disappointing surprise for the player who thought they had an awesome plan that you are now informing them won't work.
The point of impact is the creature - not the space it is on - because the creature is the target. It is 1. or 3. on the list depending on how the player decides to lay out their attacks. They are perfectly ok to choose each target after making their attacks - but they are also perfectly ok to choose them all up-front and in either situation there is no difference to the outcome. There are still 4 attacks - 4 hits and 4 pushbacks.
The point of impact is the creature, but if 4 things push the same creature 10ft each in the same direction from the same point at the same time
But they do not hit at the same time. The spell doesn't say they do - while MM does. Therefore they don't hit at the same time - therefore the target can be pushed before the next beam hits them.
The point of impact is the creature - not the space it is on - because the creature is the target. It is 1. or 3. on the list depending on how the player decides to lay out their attacks. They are perfectly ok to choose each target after making their attacks - but they are also perfectly ok to choose them all up-front and in either situation there is no difference to the outcome. There are still 4 attacks - 4 hits and 4 pushbacks.
The point of impact is the creature, but if 4 things push the same creature 10ft each in the same direction from the same point at the same time, then it is not assumed by all of us that the result of that is an additive 40ft. That is not written anywhere. It is a perfectly sensible interpretation, but it isn't the only one.
And I think the point is a DM should choose which of these perfectly sensible options they will use every time, because they all have different results in different situations. If a creature is standing on a low ridge then a single beam might knock them backwards and down into full cover so under interpretation 3 they can no longer be targeted, while an additive four beams from interpretation 1 might knock them all the way off the cliff behind the ridge and kill them.
This group of DMs does not agree on which interpretation is correct, so you can't assume your players will all your share your interpretation. It is a conversation that may need to be had before it becomes an argument at the table or a disappointing surprise for the player who thought they had an awesome plan that you are now informing them won't work.
The creature is pushed on a hit and separate attack rolls are resolved separately and sequentially. So you'd resolve the first attack roll and if you hit, push the target 10 feet. Then you'd resolve the second attack roll and then push the target another 10 feet. There's no simultaneous resolution for a spell likeEldritch Blast per RAW (unlike Magic Missile or an area of effect spell like Fireball
This applies to all rules, not just spells. Applying that Rule to Repelling Blast : "When you hit a creature with Eldritch Blast you can push that creature 10 feet away from you..." . If it only does what it says it does, then it works every time you hit a creature, regardless of how many times it has been hit before. Your own words prove our argument, and exclude yours by default, because for your argument to work, you have to add an exception to the invocation that just isn't there.
Whether you emit the beams sequentially or in unison is 1) not something that's actually stated at all, so it's entirely a function of the player's description and 2) entirely irrelevant. Repelling blast is extraordinarily clear: "When you hit... you push..." If you hit five times, you push five times. The invocation cares exactly zero about when the hits are, relative to each other.
The title of the spell is not the rule of the spell, but also, how do you roll to hit all at once, then roll damage for each, while selecting individual targets and tracking hit rolls, AC, and damage? But its a moot point any way...if you target an enemy with 3 of 4 blasts, do you roll to hit once or three times? you roll 3 times. If you hit 2 times, then the invocation applies twice, because the invocation activates on a hit.. if you hit twice, it activates twice.
There is no exception Each blast moves the target Up to 10ft but it is only 10ft this is not real life it is a spell it can only move the target 10ft from the point of impact I know other DM will not rule this way but what I am saying is that this is a legal way to rule the spell at discretion.
No, it is not a "legal" way to rule the spell, except in the sense that a DM is free to ignore whatever rules they want. Each hit moves the target up to 10 feet. If there are five hits, each one moves the target up to 10 feet entirely separately from the others. That is the only way to rule that is consistent with the actual text.
If each blast moves the target up to 10 feet, then 3 blasts can move a target up to 30 feet (10 per each blast). Again, these are your words, and they are proving our point. The spell doesn't care where you are when you start. it targets you, not the spot. This is very plain english, and at this point I have to believe you are either trolling or just in denial that you could be wrong (and again, very clearly, you are wrong here)
I already responded to this "up to 10 ft" part. It says that because an obstacle might get in the way and not be able to push the creature 10 ft. There could be a wall directly behind them and they don't get moved at all. If it didn't say "up to" then theoretically it could push a creature through literally anything because they would be moved 10 ft regardless (because spells do what they say they do).
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
No, you cannot interject movement between attacks of a multi-attack spell, but you're getting closer. The general rule is that you can break up your movement before and after taking an action, not during.
The ability to move in-between attacks is explicitly a specific exception, and it only applies to actions involving multiple weapon attacks. That's usually just the Attack action for PCs.
Move? No, that is correct, you cannot move. Choose different targets? Yes, you absolutely can.
Scorching Ray resolves the same way as Eldritch Blast does. It can produce multiple beams, you can designate your target for each beam, and each beam is resolved as an independent attack/damage roll. You do not have to "lock in" your targeting. If beam #1 kills target #1, choose a new target (in range) for additional beams. You can do them one at a time.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
here lies the issue YES all can move the target 10ft. No this does not ensure that each moves it an additional 10ft. Each blast colliding moves the target 10ft from that point in which the spell collides with the target.
Except that's not true because they do not hit simultaneously (because the spell doesn't say it does - whereas another spell (MM) does). If they hit simultaneously there could be an argument to say they are only 1 attack - but they are not - they are multiple attacks. So they hit and move and hit and move and so on.
To say they all hit before they move the target is literally making up a rule.
It says it moves the target per hit. It doesn't say "per hit but only once per target".
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Where, exactly, is the point in which the spell collides with the target? Wherever the target is located at that moment.
Are you starting to see how this works?
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
there is nothing stating the beams collided in that order. Again if that is what you want that is fine you can rule that. However i think it is disingenuous to not see the other side where all 3 beams are making contact at the same time each roll is only to see if the beams deal appropriate damage.
but the roll isn't just doing that; its determining a "hit" which also determines (in this case) whether the repelling effect takes place. Each roll determines each hit, which triggers each application of the invocation. You don't get to say "it doesn't move you this time" on a second or third hit because the rules don't allow you to.
What the heck happened? This question was answered a year ago.
Repelling blast triggers for each hit, of which there can be multiple depending on caster level. There aren't any other rules at play here, just the spell and the feature.
As for whether or not there has been a ruling on if the rules as written work as written, there conveniently is in the SAC on DDB:
This makes it clear that you hit the target, it gets pushed back, then next beam you roll to attack in its new position, from which it can be pushed again if hit.
Here are three possible interpretations of how the spell and invocation work. All are internally logical, but based on different assumptions and interpretations of orders of things. Assume 4 beams are to be fired at one creature, and all attacks hit:
1. The caster chooses the creature. Rolls 4 attack dice. Creature takes 4x damage. Creature flies 40ft back based on additive spell effect.
2. The caster chooses the creature. Rolls 4 attack dice. Creature takes 4x damage. Because each beam is only moving the creature 10ft from this point of impact, creatures moves 10ft.
3. The caster chooses the creature. Rolls 1 attack dice. Creature takes 1x damage, moves 10ft. Caster chooses same creature again. Repeat, moving 10ft each time.
Of those three, I prefer 2 and 3 for personal interpretation reasons (I dislike 1 because spells don't usually combine cumulative effects other than damage). But they are different in many ways. If you subscribe to 2, then you must choose all targets of Eldritch Blast before any dice are rolled. 3, and you must ask the question, what happens if the first beam knocks the target out of range or kills it? Choose another target? 3 feels like an interpretation that results in the spell being generally more powerful, while 1 or 2 are more time-efficient.
I acknowledge the general principle of non-simultaneity which might point us toward interpretation 3, but the vast majority of spells which have us choose multiple targets require all choices at the moment of casting, so there is a natural reluctance to head that way just for this spell.
None of these are illogical interpretations. Please avoid talking down to the other side of the debate like they are morons who just couldn't possibly understand the rules.
The point of impact is the creature - not the space it is on - because the creature is the target. It is 1. or 3. on the list depending on how the player decides to lay out their attacks. They are perfectly ok to choose each target after making their attacks - but they are also perfectly ok to choose them all up-front and in either situation there is no difference to the outcome. There are still 4 attacks - 4 hits and 4 pushbacks.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
The rules on stacking spell effects apply to spells with overlapping durations. Spells with duration Instantaneous cannot overlap as they are resolved instantly. Sage Advice Compendium also specifies that spells that let you make multiple attack rolls are resolved independently and sequentially, again meaning they don't overlap.
Repelling blast applies on a hit, and eldritch blast targets a creature, not a point. This means the following:
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
The point of impact is the creature, but if 4 things push the same creature 10ft each in the same direction from the same point at the same time, then it is not assumed by all of us that the result of that is an additive 40ft. That is not written anywhere. It is a perfectly sensible interpretation, but it isn't the only one.
And I think the point is a DM should choose which of these perfectly sensible options they will use every time, because they all have different results in different situations. If a creature is standing on a low ridge then a single beam might knock them backwards and down into full cover so under interpretation 3 they can no longer be targeted, while an additive four beams from interpretation 1 might knock them all the way off the cliff behind the ridge and kill them.
This group of DMs does not agree on which interpretation is correct, so you can't assume your players will all your share your interpretation. It is a conversation that may need to be had before it becomes an argument at the table or a disappointing surprise for the player who thought they had an awesome plan that you are now informing them won't work.
But they do not hit at the same time. The spell doesn't say they do - while MM does. Therefore they don't hit at the same time - therefore the target can be pushed before the next beam hits them.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
The creature is pushed on a hit and separate attack rolls are resolved separately and sequentially. So you'd resolve the first attack roll and if you hit, push the target 10 feet. Then you'd resolve the second attack roll and then push the target another 10 feet. There's no simultaneous resolution for a spell likeEldritch Blast per RAW (unlike Magic Missile or an area of effect spell like Fireball
Find my D&D Beyond articles here